Surface property alterations and osteoblast attachment to contaminated titanium surfaces after different surface treatments: An in vitro study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies have reported a high prevalence of peri-implantitis. The etiology of peri-implantitis remains unclear and no available treatments result in total resolution of established peri-implantitis. PURPOSE: To investigate the factors that interfere with osteoblast adhesion to contaminated titanium surfaces after different surface treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Grade 4 titanium discs were randomly divided into 5 groups and each group was divided into 2 subgroups, with one contaminated with Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A. actinomycetemcomitans), and the other contaminated with Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis). Group 1 did not receive bacterial inoculation or surface debridement and served as a control. Group 2 received A. actinomycetemcomitans or P. gingivalis inoculation, separately. Group 3 received bacterial inoculation and titanium curette debridement, followed by normal saline irrigation. Group 4 received bacterial inoculation, curette debridement, normal saline irrigation, and ultrasonication. Group 5 received bacterial inoculation, curette debridement, normal saline irrigation, and placement in 0.12% chlorhexidine. After various surface treatments, the surface roughness and hydrophilicity of the titanium surface were measured, the number of adhered osteoblast cells was calculated, and the amount of residual lipopolysaccharide (LPS) was quantified. RESULTS: A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis biofilms noticeably reduced surface hydrophilicity. Groups 3-5 showed decreased hydrophilicity and fewer adhered osteoblast cells compared with the control group. Although ultrasonication was more effective in removing LPS than curette debridement and chlorhexidine, cell adhesion was not as high as with clean titanium discs. CONCLUSIONS: The non-surgical treatment used in this study was not effective in removing LPS from titanium surfaces and increasing osteoblast adhesion. A more effective method to remove LPS completely is required to enhance the treatment outcome of peri-implantitis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".